Thread: New Hardy suppressors

every ones cans go at some stage there would have been a fair few of each.
Gun works run old school KISS cans not the best but keep chugging away with good rep
Dan runs new technology cans pushing the boundrys to be the best. lightest shortest forward with good reduction in noise as well so are hard well in my opinion impossible to go past.
Only heard of his older ones going, new ones are very well made an engineered

I would have thaught DPT would have taken lightest, and if you remove a baffle or so it becomes less than 80mm forward

Ill let you know when it turns up

I have a 4 baffle DPT and when fitted, I dont even notice any change in weight, balance or even MPI. Not sure on its noise reduction as I still wear hearing protection but it doesnt sound any different to others I have or used. It is lighter than advertised by a smidge. I highly rate them for a bolt gun.

Originally Posted by Bill999

I would have thaught DPT would have taken lightest, and if you remove a baffle or so it becomes less than 80mm forward

Ill let you know when it turns up

But removing it decreases performance it can't not like the atec etc everything has compromise, it's only my opinion but hardy covers them all well to suit all range of people and tested to with stand more then rated for so light for hunting and solid for range work with out adding or removing baffles less things for average goe to play with an go wrong with same poi not having to resite for more or less baffles.

Have talked to Dan about his testing here's what he said quoting testing. . ..

"Our Db testing for our standard size can is done on a Remington 308.

Destructive testing for standard suppressor is done on a 16” barrelled 300 wsm – 100 rounds with no signs of stretching of deformation. We get the ammo loaded by the guys at dead eye dicks so they can attest to the strength of the suppressors.

Proof testing in the UK for standard 308 suppressor is done with a 300 win mag with 25% over max loads.

*

The London proof master is ex EME Army Armourer same as our crew so it’s really cool talking to him about how he proofs our gear.

They don’t even bother trying to abuse the magnum suppressors"

*
This is a bread winner right there. . . . .


Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by tui_man2

every ones cans go at some stage there would have been a fair few of each.
Gun works run old school KISS cans not the best but keep chugging away with good rep
Dan runs new technology cans pushing the boundrys to be the best. lightest shortest forward with good reduction in noise as well so are hard well in my opinion impossible to go past.
Only heard of his older ones going, new ones are very well made an engineered

+1 I started experimenting in the late 80's on centerfire supps. Had all manner of sizes, configurations and weights. Had all manner of problems as well. Glad I never tried marketing them back then. The first effective one, for full load centerfires I seen, was a Tiffen one. It was a simple but effective design. Cooper was the only commercial/military one at the time, that come out with a can for the AW, it was only used with subsonic 7.62.
It has steamrolled from there over the last few years. Trying to meet the demands of lighter and quieter suppressors you are surely going to have problems.
I reckon what is available in NZ are all reasonably similar apart from a bit of weight. You can only work with materials and machinery that are available and I personally think simple is best.
Good on kiwis trying to improve on their product by experimenting. But at the end of the day a centerfire supp is never going to get any quieter than say a .22 mag so I dont see the point of getting one that is slightly quieter than the other. Reliability, safety and weight and cost are all that really interest me.
If you are paying some of the prices I have seen on some supps ($700-$800) you are been had, IMO.

the titanium ones need to charge more than the alu ones tho, their bare materials cost in excess of $400 just for the Ti powder that goes into them

Fair enough. But they are over priced for what they are IMO as well. But I reckon $400 is to much even for alloy ones, knowing what work goes into most of them that are available today anyway

The ODL Ti cans are currently the most innovative in the country in my opinion. He can make pretty much anything a customer wants on the 3D printer. They are exceptionally light weight and can stand up to real abuse. The prohibitive side, as Bill stated, is the cost of the raw materials, which means they will always be priced higher. The machine itself also costs a fortune to set up and run. The margin made on his cans isn't that great as a result.

Originally Posted by Beavis

The ODL Ti cans are currently the most innovative in the country in my opinion. He can make pretty much anything a customer wants on the 3D printer. They are exceptionally light weight and can stand up to real abuse. The prohibitive side, as Bill stated, is the cost of the raw materials, which means they will always be priced higher. The machine itself also costs a fortune to set up and run. The margin made on his cans isn't that great as a result.

Its one of those compromise things again, I agree its very cool printing them an mike anything you want but like you say it comes at a cost an that's where it prices its self out.

Interested to see how other manufactures test there cans, some people must have good relations with them or they are on here anyway so be interesting to see?